Is carbon dioxide removal in the Arctic region really feasible?

Walter Leal Filho; Johannes M. Luetz; Maria Alzira Pimenta Dinis; Julian David Hunt; Gustavo J. Nagy

doi:10.1016/j.resenv.2026.100289

Back

Is carbon dioxide removal in the Arctic region really feasible?

Journal article

Open access

Peer reviewed

Is carbon dioxide removal in the Arctic region really feasible?

Walter Leal Filho, Johannes M. Luetz, Maria Alzira Pimenta Dinis, Julian David Hunt and Gustavo J. Nagy

Resources, Environment and Sustainability, Vol.23, pp.1-8

2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resenv.2026.100289

Files and links (1)

pdf

1-s2.0-S2666916126000022-main8.00 MBDownload View

Published VersionCC BY V4.0, Open Access

Abstract

Arctic carbon dioxide removal

Climate mitigation

Direct air capture and storage (DACCS)

Enhanced rock weathering (ERW)

Environmental governance

Nature-based solutions (NbS)

Ocean alkalinity enhancement (OAE)

Permafrost

The Arctic region, warming at nearly four times the global average rate, is both an important carbon sink and a potential source of greenhouse gas emissions, especially due to thawing permafrost. Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is increasingly recognised as a necessary measure to support global efforts to reduce emissions. This article examines whether, and under what conditions, large-scale CDR deployment in the Arctic is practically feasible. It also discusses the challenges associated with it. We synthesise peer-reviewed evidence on the performance of key CDR approaches relevant to high-latitude environments, including nature-based solutions (NbS), e.g. peatland restoration, blue carbon protection and afforestation, as well as enhanced rock weathering (ERW), ocean alkalinity enhancement (OAE) and direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS). Across these approaches, the feasibility is constrained by permafrost dynamics, hydrology, ecological sensitivity, energy availability, monitoring and verification, and governance. Whereas some CDR methods offer potential climate benefits, most are characterised by considerable uncertainty and context-dependent trade-offs. None currently demonstrates unequivocal feasibility at scale under Arctic conditions. Beyond these technical and ecological constraints, we identify four clusters of socio-political barriers that further complicate Arctic CDR: governance fragmentation, geopolitical tensions, inadequate regulatory mechanisms, and uneven global deployment. A comparative assessment suggests that peatland restoration and blue carbon protection are the most immediately actionable options, whereas DACCS and OAE would require substantial new infrastructure and energy investment. The study concludes by outlining targeted policy and research priorities to address existing technological, ecological, and governance challenges, and to situate Arctic CDR within broader mitigation strategies without risking over-reliance or mitigation deterrence. The novelty of this paper lies in its analysis of the multiple variables that influence the viability of CDR. Overall, Arctic CDR appears technically possible but remains highly constrained, with its feasibility contingent on meeting stringent operational conditions, robust governance, and continued emissions reductions elsewhere.

Details

Title: Is carbon dioxide removal in the Arctic region really feasible?
Authors: Walter Leal Filho - HAW Hamburg
Johannes M. Luetz (Corresponding Author) - University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Academic Support Unit
Maria Alzira Pimenta Dinis - Fernando Pessoa University
Julian David Hunt - King Abdullah University of Science and Technology
Gustavo J. Nagy - Universidad de la República de Uruguay
Publication details: Resources, Environment and Sustainability, Vol.23, pp.1-8
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date published: 2026
DOI: 10.1016/j.resenv.2026.100289
ISSN: 2666-9161
Copyright note: © 2026 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Lishui Institute of Ecology and Environment, Nanjing University. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Grant note: This work acknowledges the support of the Foundation for Science and Technology within the framework of the UID/04292/MARE - Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre.
Organisation Unit: Academic Support Unit; Sustainability Research Cluster
Language: English
Record Identifier: 991208975902621
Output Type: Journal article

Metrics

1 Record Views

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types: Domestic collaboration; International collaboration
Web Of Science research areas: Environmental Sciences; Environmental Studies; Green & Sustainable Science & Technology

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

Source: InCites